How many arbitrators should the parties choose and which is the criteria leading them to such decision? The answers were the complexity of the case (including multiparty arbitration) and the value of the dispute.
What is an appointing authority and who can act as an appointing authority? When are the situations of such nature that is better to have the arbitrators appointed by an appointing authority?
The most delightful part of the class was the enumeration of those categories of people whom one should not appoint as arbitrators:
1. The Ego-tripper arbitrator, guess?
2. The Super-barrister arbitrator, who acts as counsel of the party;
3. The Super-judge arbitrator, who creates a great number of situations in which he should decide afterwards, making the arbitration procedure difficult;
4. The White Knight arbitrator, who is in the cast for the absolute truth, who acts as an investigator and wants details about all minor aspects, wants details;
5. The Wimp arbitrator, who is unable to be firm, wants to please everybody and cannot take decisions for the proper unfolding of the arbitration procedure;
6. The Unemployed Time Saver arbitrator, who sees arbitration only as a great mean to meet people and chat, to socialize.1